# Existing Alternative Analysis

![](https://1133336279-files.gitbook.io/~/files/v0/b/gitbook-legacy-files/o/assets%2F-LMfHy2q5j6aiULboyh2%2F-LPLjmjYWtvGRAoh7oz-%2F-LPLlELfY1tA9fOeRzCb%2FExploring%20Concepts%20-%20Comparative%20Analysis%20Data%20%26%20Graphs.png?alt=media\&token=92aaaae2-8805-4800-bb2d-2662ab33ff1f)

Another exploration of the feasibility, desirability and viability of the portfolio of concepts was to explore what else was out there that could achieve the same ends.

In this case, I did a basic market analysis against the personas and jobs to be done I had developed. I created a framework for scoring each alternative option based on my research findings about what people valued, then generated a graph to visualise the shape of each option.

This enabled me to look at opportunities for creating something different which had a blend of needs directed towards the specific needs of the people I seek to support.

## Key Insights

### 1. Ideal shape

The exercise was very helpful in drawing together my research into an actionable framework to guide further design work on the concepts, and direct ongoing research activities.

Recognising the structural limitations (such as the way FlukerPosts was built around an academic research project) of alternatives helped to see what aspect of a business model may be sustainable and what may not be.

### 2. Leveraging emerging theory

One advantage of having worked in the sector, but also having had a very varied working life (and a research-centric personality), is that I have been exposed to a number of different disciplines.

In designing a concept in the capacity building area, I recognised that I was drawing on my work in social sciences, such as psychology, organisational learning theory, movement building, and wellbeing science.

### 3. Pricing strategies

Comparative analysis is always helpful to also build a picture of what it costs for someone to achieve their current goals, to help inform pricing strategy.

One aspect that emerged from my research was the challenge of pricing strategy for the community-based conservation groups. Many groups have some form of funding for time and/or operational overhead, however it’s often less than it really takes to run a project. The governance, operations and administration of a group would typically rely on volunteers to some degree - whether it’s people giving their time fully for free, or people who are employed, giving additional time ‘to get the work that is needed to be done, done’.

The ramifications of this is that a traditional pricing strategy may look at costing a solution (such as the photo monitoring concept) against the time needed to achieve the outcome at the moment (e.g. 10 hours), and find a way to achieve the outcome quicker in exchange for a fee (e.g. $100). When a group doesn’t value their time in financial terms, it makes product and pricing strategy much more difficult.\
